Set-up: In DWI cases, Motion to Suppress the stop for speeding where the stop is based solely on a radar reading

Situation 1: An officer didn't calibrate the radar unit. Anyone know of any case law that says the radar unit's reading by itself is enough to reach reasonable suspicion to stop?

Situation 2: The the officer didn't calibrate the unit with tuning forks, but did run the internal diagnostic on the radar unit. Anyone aware of any case law that would qualify the internal diagnostic as sufficient for calibration and accuracy purposes?

I'm looking for law on stopping a vehicle solely based on radar unit readings, NOT in combination with officer estimation of speed. I haven't been able to find anything quite specific enough.

A couple of the cases cited in this post might be a good starting point...

https://tdcaa.infopop.net/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=347098965&f=6050918821&m=2511097161&r=1281000261#1281000261

FYI, the officer does not calibrate the radar he merely checks the calibration using the tuning forks. I know it is semantics, but a little part of me dies inside when I hear this.

Ours are professionally checked every year and the calibration is certified at that time. Did the officer happen to check the calibration before his last shift or at any recent point?

I would think you would have more of a problem wtih the lack of visual estimation, as everything I have been taught/teach revolves around the idea that the radar is merely a tool to confirm your observation of high speed.

One of my troopers told me that at DPS academy they must be able to estimate speed within 5 mph on visual. They are trained on this he said.
As the prior post stated the radar is supposed to be "verification of observation" in almost all cases, that is training and policy.
You might verify this. Especially the part about being able to estimate speed.
Does it not seem that failure to calibrate on the day goes to the weight of the evidence not admissibility? John, CA, Hansford Co.

Thanks for the replies. I'm aware of the issues raised, but I'm in need of case law supporting that radar (where the calibration has not been checked by the officer), by itself, would give the officer reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle. Or on the flip side, anyone aware of any case law that visual estimation, alone, by an officer that the vehicle was traveling over the speed limit would give the officer reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle?

You don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the driver was speeding, just that the officer was justified in pulling him over. I fhte officer, in his experience, thought the driver looked like he was speeding, and the radar--which the officer had no reason to believe was not working properly--corroborated his impression, the what argument can be made that he didn't at least have reasonable suspicion to stop?

Try Icke v. State, 36 S.W.3d 913, 916 (Tex. App--Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, pet. ref'd) -- The defendant was complaining about the radar, but the court held first that the officer's visual estimation of speed was enough, and second that even if the radar wasn't functioning it was still enough to give the officer reasonable suspicion. "A stop that meets the test for reasonable suspicion is lawful even if the facts supporting the stop are ultimately shown to be inaccurate or false."

quote:

---

we disagree with appellant's contention that unless [the officer] knew the exact speed which the automobile was traveling, no violation occurred.

---

Dillard v. State, 550 S.W.2d 45, 53 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977)